Judge allows suit against local teacher

Sunday

Feb 21, 2010 at 12:01 AM

A federal judge will allow a jury to hear a lawsuit against a popular Pleasant Valley High School teacher whose use of photographs of mutilated nude corpses and sexually charged classroom discussions offended a former student.

DAN BERRETT

A federal judge will allow a jury to hear a lawsuit against a popular Pleasant Valley High School teacher whose use of photographs of mutilated nude corpses and sexually charged classroom discussions offended a former student.

U.S. District Court Judge James Munley ruled that the case can proceed against the teacher, Bruce Smith, who is accused of creating a hostile environment in his classroom.

Munley also ruled last month that arguments can move forward regarding whether the school's principal, John Gress, retaliated against the plaintiff's family when they first raised their complaints against Smith. The judge also allowed a jury to decide on damages.

His split ruling was made in response to requests for summary judgment filed both by the defendants — Smith, Gress, former Superintendent Frank Pullo and the school district and board — and by the plaintiffs, William and Patricia Young on behalf of their daughter.

The case was originally filed in May 2007, and sparked a firestorm of local attention, featuring a roadside rally from current and former students and their parents in support of Smith.

Munley found that reasonable jurors could reach different conclusions about the meaning of the evidence, which meant that summary judgment was not appropriate.

The evidence, the judge ruled, indicated that Smith frequently discussed sexual topics in graphic detail, including his own sexual history, and that he asked his students about theirs. Smith also showed pictures of naked and dismembered corpses, most depicting the Holocaust and the murders committed by serial killer Ed Gein and Charles Manson and his followers.

"I was offended by what I was being shown," the Youngs' daughter, who was Smith's student, said in her deposition. "I remember walking out of the classroom fairly sick more than one day."

Munley said a reasonable juror could find such material to be "simply an example of the unpleasantness and violence characteristic of the 20th century," but he also found that a juror could conclude that these materials and methods created a hostile environment as defined by the law.

A reasonable difference in interpretation also could be formed regarding the impact of Gress' handling of the complaints and whether Gress revealed that the Youngs complained about Smith's teaching, Munley wrote.

"If a jury concluded that Gress purposefully revealed the plaintiffs' names, that juror could reasonably find that a person of ordinary firmness would be deterred from complaining again," Munley wrote, referring to a standard by which First Amendment retaliation claims are decided.

Munley also noted that Gress closely examined Smith's autobiographical novel, which he made available to students, where he found inappropriate material and references to sex and drinking. Gress described Smith's class assignments as "inappropriate," "unprofessional" and bearing "no relationship to the curriculum."

At the end of the year, Smith received an unsatisfactory evaluation. He was suspended three days with pay and for 10 days without, according to court documents. He still teaches at the high school.

After news of the suit was published in the Pocono Record, the family moved and the girl graduated from a different high school. The unnamed former student said that other students cursed her in the halls and threatened to beat her up. One person posting on an online forum on the Record's Web site said he or she would burn down the family's house.

Munley dismissed other aspects of the original complaint. He rejected claims that Pullo retaliated against the Youngs and that the district had failed to properly train staff in protecting against sexual harassment.

The district was disappointed that the entire case was not dismissed, said its lawyer, John Freund.

"We believe that this is not the kind of a case that should occupy the time of a federal jury," he said. "Nevertheless, we understand the basis for the legal opinion."

The plaintiffs were buoyed by the ruling, said their lawyer, Cynthia Pollick.

"We are obviously happy that the public will get to see exactly what Mr. Smith was teaching minor students and that the administration was allowing," she said.

No trial date has been set.

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.